The Delta Shipbuilding Company of New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, which was to consist of six slipways (later increased to eight) was one of nine new shipyards for which building approval was given by the United States Maritime Commission (USMC) early in 1941 under the emergency shipbuilding programme. Under this emergency programme, a total of 2,700 ships were built. The new Yard was operated by the management and key personnel of the American Shipbuilding Company, of Cleveland, Ohio, USA, a leading shipbuilder on the Great Lakes. Under the control of the new management from ASB, the subsidiary Company, Delta Shipbuilding, was formed. Supplemented by local employment, the Yard workforce grew to more than 13,000 employees by June 1942. Delta specialised in 100% welded construction and, as launchings were into a relatively narrow channel, the ships from this Yard were launched by the sideways method – see photograph of S.S. SAMUEL DEXTER being launched by this method in March 1943.

Built as Yard No. 42, the S.S. Samuel Dexter was one of 132 Liberty Cargo Ships built at Delta Shipbuilding Company. Delta were also later involved in the design of the Liberty oil tanker, then the Liberty collier, and was subsequently to build a total of 32 Liberty Tankers and 24 Liberty Colliers, before the yard was shut down in 1945. Although not renowned as one of the fastest of the Amercian shipbuilders, nevertheless the facts are impressive, if not astonishing. During the three years of its existence, the output of ships from the New Orleans Yard of Delta averaged slightly more than five per month, or a ship every six days of its existence.

The S.S. Samuel Dexter, Call Sign KKMB, was owned by the United States War Shipping Administration and managed by the Waterman Steamship Company of Mobile, Alabama. She was named after Samuel Dexter, an American jurist and politician (born 1761 – died 1816) who went on to serve as the United States Secretary of War in 1800, and Secretary of the Treasury in 1801.

Her keel was laid down at the Delta yard on 16th February 1943. Launching took place on 29th March 1943, and final delivery on 15th April 1943. Build time to delivery stage : 58 days.

Only nine months after entering service, the S.S. Samuel Dexter came to grief during bad weather in the Atlantic.

On the night of 21st of January 1944, whilst on a passage lightship from Cardiff to New York, and in a position reported as 54’ 48” North, 22’ 45” West, the S.S. Samuel Dexter, Official No. 243200, was experiencing heavy weather in high seas, with Force 8 WSW gale conditions.

At 21:00 hours, the deck stated to crack open opposite No. 3 hatch. With this discovery, the ship was turned to put her stern to the sea and she was hove to with 47 RPM on the engine. At 21:16 hours, the deck started to crack at the No. 4 hatch. In the daylight of the 22nd January 1944, a thorough examination was carried out and showed the following structural defects :

Two cracks from the forward corners of the No. 3 hatch had propogated across the deck and down her side to a point below the second deck, on both the port and starboard sides.

The crack at the port/aft corner of No. 3 hatch was in fact three separate cracks and it could not be determined where these cracks originated.

The crack across the deck from the starboard/forward corner of No. 4 hatch ran down her side to a point below the waterline.

During the period 22nd to 24th January 1944, the weather moderated and a watch was kept on the cracks, which were seen to be gradually increasing, opening and closing about one inch in the seaway.

With a forecast of further bad weather on 24th January 1944, the decision was taken to abandon ship and this operation took place between 15:30 – 16:30 hours on the afternoon of 24th January 1944.

On board the stricken vessel, under the command of Captain Delaware L. Hurston, there was a total complement of 70 men, comprising a crew of 42 officers and ratings, and 28 armed guards/gunners.

The armed trawler, HMS Sapper, picked up the entire complement and proceeded to Liverpool where they were landed, and later repatriated to the USA.

The drifting S.S. Samuel Dexter meantime, despite the serious fractures that had opened up and adverse weather conditions, remained afloat and intact, eventually coming ashore near Scurrival Point on the West side of the island of Barra in the Outer Hebrides, Scotland, in late January 1944.

In 1945, work began on breaking up the S.S. Samuel Dexter where she lay. This work was undertaken by a salvage company from mainland Scotland, who brought salvage vessels and equipment to Barra for the operations. The salvage operation took more than six months to complete.

The cut-up steel was transported from the West side of the Island to the East side, at Eoligarry, to be loaded on board shallow-draught vessels for onward transportation to the breaker’s yard. The principal vessel involved in this work was the Myles K. Burton, and it is believed the small vessels Usk and Cushag were also engaged in the work.

The above placements reflect the known position as of the early 1970’s. The ultimate disposition of those vessels returned to the USMC after WWII and placed in the ‘Mothball Fleet’ of naval reserves is not known sufficiently well at this point.

The S.S. Robert E. Peary, launched by Permanente Metals Corporation Yard No. 2, on the 12th of November 1942, as their Yard Number 440. This vessel was launched in only four days and fifteen and a half hours after her keel was laid at Yard No. 2 and this remains a world-wide record to this day.

Hello Angus and this remarkable piece you have posted here for our benefit.
I mean, how do you build a Liberty ship in 4 days 15 1/2 hours. That is less time than the average mortal takes to awaken dans le morn.
Could you tell me after whom these ships were named. Not individually of course, but a general synopsis.
Do they have a common connection.
Will be fascinated to know.
Thanks. E28

You have to hand it to the Americans when it comes to innovation. Even before the exigencies of wartime the USA had experiemented in and developed the concept of prefabrication. How ahead of their time were they? Well, it was only quite some time after WWII that British shipyards started to toy with the idea of breaking away from plate-small construction, riveting, and our many other outdated shipbuilding techniques. Once Britain formally requested American aid with the outbreak of war, the full power and might of the American way of doing things kicked in. The leading lights got their heads together and decided that first they had to build much more shipyards, wherever they could be laid out, on the shoresides, in rivers, anywhere they could launch and float off new shipping be it conventional or side-launching. They had full Government support and the necessary trades and skillsets were shipped to the numerous sites PDQ lest any time be lost as it was obvious to all concerned that the greatest threat the UK faced was the systematic destruction of its shipping on which it relied heavily for sustenance, materials, grain, rubber, and of course the implements of warfare.

The next objective, in which the USA excelled itself, was planning how to build ships in a matter of weeks, i.e from laying down of keels to 'full away'. This they did by gearing up for it properly. Large fabrication shops that could work around the clock knocking out standard sections perhaps weighing as much as 100 tons at a time. They then blasted and painted these, fitted them out and by neat logistics and equipment loved the 'pieces' into their final position on the building berths where armies of steelworkers, shipwrights, joiners, welders, electricians awaiting the deliveries. Separately, tradesmen were being trained up all the time, so that skillsets were never but in plentiful supply. Many of these Liberty vessels were welded up by large squads female welders, so of these mere girls, who worked long hours and were most dilligent.

It was a bit like a large Lego toy with many parts and devices. Prefabricate all the component parts ahead of the game, then, when required, just bring them all together and assemble. The Japanese, Koreans, Fins, Swedes, Norwegians, Dutch and anyone who wanted to remain viable, never mind successful in the shipbuilding game, learned much from this historical success story. Today prefabrication of shipping and offshore modules is the only way to go and is commonplace - no big deal. In 1939 / 1940 it was innovative and a bit scary. Incredibly in the short few years they were building Liberty Emergency Type vessels, America launched more than 2,700 of them.

For Liberty read 'no frills'. There was no time, material nor cost wasted on fancy wood panelling and finishes, they were fairly spartan in finish. However those who worked them were eventually very fond of them and considered them to be reliable. The well-known shipping companies (Blue Funnel, Harrison, BP, Esso, etc) who acquired some of them immediatelt following the cessation of hostilities were more than pleased to get them and they were well served. They were only designed to last a few years to see the war out. In fact, many had a working life of 30 years or more.

Almost every Liberty was named after a famous American. These were men who had been achievers, inventors, great military men, captains of industry, political heavyweights, whatever. You will note that in all cases they are male too !

Hope that explains to some small degree. For a really good authoratitive read on the subject, I recommend 'The Liberty Ships' by L.A. Sawyer and W.H. Mitchell.

Thankyou Angus, most informative and interesting.
Did we in the UK at the time have an equivalent to these Liberty ships.
I know we did in the Great war. Or at least the principle was the same, maybe that was where the idea originated, or did Henry Ford have shares and an interest.
Thanks. E28

The U.K. shipyards continued, at maximum possible output, producing merchant and naval vessels, and in comparison to past production rates some of these shipyards, bearing in mind the restricted building berths, the constant bombing, the logistics in getting the necessary materials to the Yards to support a meaningful construction programme, did an exceptional job. It was recognised early on that a major replacement building programme would have to happen if the country was to survive the Battle of the Atlantic and essential foodstuffs and other commodities imported from neutral countries. Thus the concept of the no-frills emergency 'liberty' was born, and to succeed new methods, skillsets and suitable premises would have to be found. This is where the USA came in. Discussions and proposals had been mooted between the two powers, but at this stage, 1940, Britain was alone fighting the Axis threat, and unless the USA could lend support the future was simply a matter of time.

Something on a far greater scale than British shipyards could produce was required and, in the autumn of 1940, a British delegation headed by senior representation of the Sunderland Yard of J. L. Thompson travelled to the USA with the objective of ordering merchant ships to replace the huge losses to date. The USA being a neutral at that stage, and having no restrictions in terms of logistics, materials, space, manpower, etc, it was proposed to convince the American powers that be to implement a fast building programme based on the Thompson designed and built 'Dorington Court', built in 1939. In this regard, the delegation carried with them the complete set of plans and details, albeit a slightly less complicated standard cargo vessel of around 10,000 tons and a useful speed of 11 knots with a 2,500 IHP power plant. This then was the start of what was to become one amazing fast-track development if shipbuilding and marine engineering, where prefabrication and module construction was adopted before the desciptions became fashionable, including the wiring out and plumbing of whole accommodatio 'packages', and of course the real 'winner' - electric welding in lieu of traditional welding.

Oh, yes, the USA made a lot of money out of the venture too ! The Lease and Lend system - another innovative development borne of necessity for a small maritime nation fighting for its life.

I think the answer E28 seeks is that the UK did produce its own 'Liberty ships', although not called such there was a series of standard designs developed of course from the same 'parentage' as the British-designed Liberties .... and all completed under EMPIRE names. But shipowners who already had their own acceptable design could get a special licence to allow it to take up the valuable shipyard resources, in addition to the EMPIRE output.
By the way, I was also reading that as many as 25% of the US-built Liberties had welding defects and this led to several early losses especially in the cold Arctic waters .... not to deny the great work done over there but perhaps a consequence of the learning curve of shipyards and their employees coupled with the demand for speedy results.

NB : In my original of this thread I see I referred to a photograph of the liberty-ship S.S. Samuel Dexter being side-launched, however I see no sign of the photograph - oops - I will look this out and add it to the thread.

The original thread also refers to a welding/cracking experience on the relatively new Samuel Dexter, the nature of which led to her ultimate (and arguably premature) abandonment by the crew. Whilst this was a problem on a number of these Liberty builds, I am somewhat surprised at the figure of 25% - that hardly seems credible bearing in mind a lot of these ships went on to provide 25-30 years additional service after the war.

The reference to operations in low seawater temps is one that has been argued backwards and forwards by the experts for many years and, as an interested party in matters metallurgical / welding technologies, I have always awaited some form of satisfactory conclusion if not even a 'Eurika!' moment, but unfortunately that has not happened yet. I find myself in agreement with the 'fors' and the 'againsts' in equal measure as they each raise equally valid and convincing points of view.

Following on from my earlier message, I have not unfortunately come across the photograph I referred to, if it turns up in due course I will, of course, post it with this thread.

Meantime, I have done a quick check across all builds by the Delta S. B. Company shipyard and the only vessel that 'broke up' (attributable to the issues of platework cracking and welding) was the 'Samuel Dexter. Two other ex-Delta ships, their Yard No. 103 'George A. Marr' and Yard No. 154 'William H. Kendrick, as 'Grammatiki' and 'San Nicola' respectively broke up, both in 1965, the first one sprang a leak in heavy weather in the Pacific, the other was abandoned after being damaged, but details unknown.

So, one defective ship out of 171 does not seem too bad considering these vessels were 100% welded construction.

Angus, not wishing to labour the point re weld defects, I was working from (poor) memory when I quoted the 25% figure, on page 19 of the book you refer to it's given as 12.5% and of course these did all not translate into casualties, though there were some notable ones, including a troopship version splitting open while moored ... also several incidents of propeller loss due to the method of fitting.
As I said, the huge problem of resurrecting shipbuilding on this scale in the USA could hardly be trouble-free and any problems do not detract from the enormous benefit of this programme, which helped to plug the gap left by the ealy successes of the U-boats especially in the Atlantic.
Post-war, many of the major British shipping lines relied on Liberties to fill gaps in their fleets through to the late 1950's, lines included Cunard, Ellerman, Clan and even the mighty Blue Funnel!

Back in late January, per posting No. 7, I mentioned that I would try and look out a photograph of the Liberty ship S.S. SAMUEL DEXTER being side-launched on 29th March 1943 from her building berth at the Delta Shipbuilding Yard. At last, I have found the photograph in question, together with another of her taken by the U.S. Coastguard.

Seen here in this image, on the stocks, in late 1941, the 7,176 tons Liberty oil-tanker JOHN RANDOLPH, O.N. 241394.

She was built by the Bethlehem-Fairfield Shipyard of Baltimore, their Yard Number 2006. Her machinery was from the famous company of Worthington Pump & Machinery Corporation of Harrison, N.J. She was launched on 30-12-1941 and completed in February of 1942.

Whilst on a passage from Northern Russia to Reykjavik, and in an area off the Eastern entrance to the Denmark Strait, on 05-07-1942, she was one of five vessels that were mined and sunk when they ran onto an Allied minefield. JOHN RANDOLPH broke in two pieces, of which the stern section sank. The fore section remained afloat and was towed into Reykjavik.

On 01-09-1952, whilst being towed by the Dutch tug OCEANIS from Reykjavik to the shipbreaking facility at Bo'ness for scrapping, the hulk of JOHN RANDOLPH, in heavy weather some 150 miles North-West of the Hebrides, broke adrift in position 52' 20" North, 07' 33" West.

On 05-09-1952, the abandoned hulk came ashore on Sanex beach, in Torrisdale Bay, Sutherland where it remained.

The 7,201 tons Liberty ship FREDERICK BARTHOLDI of 1943 built by J. A. Jones Construction Company at their Brunswick Shipyard in Brunswick, Georgia, as Yard Number 119 and O.N. 244490.

Launched on 09-11-1943 and completed later that same month. Her machinery was manufactured by the General Machinery Corporation of Hamilton, Ohio, USA.

On Christmas Day 1943, FREDERICK BARTHOLDI ran ashore on the Fladda Chuain rocks lying off the North coast of the Isle of Skye in the Inner Hebrides, in position 57' 44" North 06' 26" West, and was subsequently declared a total loss.

The vessel had been on a passage from Jacksonville to London with general cargo.

On 22-06-1944 she was refloated and beached. She was later towed to the River Clyde and in September 1944 was scrapped on the beach at Kames Bay

Further to the question by E28 concerning naming of Liberty ships, from Jan 22, 2011. (I know, I'm late to the party.)

Most Liberty ships were named after deceased persons (including about 100 ships named after women, please note) who were significant to the history or culture of the United States in particular, or of North America in general. Some Liberty ships were built specifically for transfer to the British Merchant Navy and these, although sometimes given an initial name based on the above, were given official names beginning "SAM..." See http://www.mariners-l.co.uk/LibShipsS.html for names of some of the "SAM" ships. Supposedly SAM meant "superstructure aft of midships" describing the general layout of Liberty ships. A competing theory is that SAM refers to a certain Uncle Sam, but I'm sure we Yanks would never stoop to direct such a subtle taunt as that at the Brits.

As one can imagine, in having to name some 2,700+ ships, one soon runs out of familiar names. As a consequence many Liberty ships carried names that few Americans of the day, much less today, would recognize. In some cases organizations that could raise sufficient funds to support the construction of a Liberty ship gained naming rights for the ship. (The construction cost of Liberty ships was typically in the range of USD 1.5 million to 1.75 million, in 1940s value. I don't know to what that would equate in pounds.) While in this case the name would still have to be that of a deceased individual, their significance to U.S. or North American history was little or none, while their connection to the organization that paid for the ship was considerable. Companies might name ships after the company's founder, labor unions after a former official, etc. The point being that many Liberty ships were named after very obscure persons.

Late in the war some 120 Liberty ships were named after crewmen who had been lost aboard Liberty ships lost earlier in the war, particularly crewmen who had performed bravely at the time of the loss. In one case a Liberty ship was inadvertently named after a living individual. That Liberty ship, SS FRANCIS J. O'GARA, built April-June 1945, was named for the purser aboard SS JEAN NICOLET, which was sunk by a Japanese submarine in 1944. O'Gara was thought to have perished but in fact spent the balance of the war in a Japanese prisoner-of-war camp. Reportedly he eventually visited the ship named for him.

The U.S. government received many suggestions from citizens, offering their own names or names of relatives or ancestors worthy of being the namesake of a Liberty ship. Presumably these suggestions were politely ignored. In other cases individuals contacted the government to complain of a Liberty ship being named after them and finding that fact to be uncomfortable, in that the letter writer was most certainly not deceased (and likely not significant to U.S. history either, although that probably wasn't mentioned). Such letters were answered by pointing out that the Liberty ship in question was named after someone else in history, both deceased and more significant.

Who is online

About Us

ClydeMaritime is a resource for all shipping news on the Clyde and beyond.

In addition to this forum, our main website contains listings for Arrivals and Departures on the Clyde, historical information and articles related to the Clyde and details of Cruise Ship visits and much more.